|
|
|
|
|
by drawkbox
941 days ago
|
|
I mostly agree but Web Components is a web standards as is templates/custom elements now. The others like React/Vue/Svelte etc are all going more for platform/framework lock-in over making sure people are doing augmentation of standards. Those frameworks have incentive to lock you in while standards are lock-in at a lower level. Other standards I like playing with direct like html/css/canvas/WebGL/storage/svg/video/audio/geo/etc and ones that are newer are WebRTC/WebGL/WebGPU/WebAssembly etc. All of these are and will be abstracted by some frameworks and people will know less about them and more about the platforms on top if they aren't regularly going direct. I think people that know about the standards more low level make for better framework developers an developers that use frameworks even. I like platforms that make web standards the core aim not the platform lock in. Lit is just a lighter weight version of that and closer to web standards without having it bolted on to a larger, almost monolithic framework now. Lit is somewhat Angular like since Google make both. |
|
People keep repeating this mantra as if this alone makes web components good
> Those frameworks have incentive to lock you in while standards are lock-in at a lower level.
Or: these frameworks have the incentive to solve problems that web standards have been unwilling to solve for decades, and won't solve for another few decades.
> I like platforms that make web standards the core aim not the platform lock in.
Then you should use literally anything else but web components. Because web components don't make standards their core, are broken on multiple levels, and will require 20 more new standards to fix things that are not broken in literally anything else: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1717580502280867847
> Lit is just a lighter weight version of that and closer to web standards
The only thing that is standard in Lit is that it compiles to web components by default.